I believe I get what you're alluding to, gratification deterrence is in effect to be mindful of the future, to always have your mind foresight centric. I can easily see how thinking like this can build civilizations that last generations plus can build wealth to sustain and even grow through out these generations. gratification deterrence however seems to me like you'd have to have a higher than normal sense of selflessness. But is selflessness a natural trait in humanity? who exactly is acting in accordance to natural human law, whites or blacks? is there even a human law and if so, how static or dynamic could it be?

Perhaps this quote by Freud can help explain this a bit better?

Quote:

‘Weltanschauung’ is, I am afraid, a specifically German notion, which it would be difficult to translate into a foreign language. If I attempt to give you a definition of the word, it can hardly fail to strike you as inept. By Weltanschauung, then, I mean an intellectual construction which gives a unified solution of all the problems of our existence in virtue of a comprehensive hypothesis, a construction, therefore, in which no question is left open and in which everything in which we are interested finds a place. It is easy to see that the possession of such a Weltanschauung is one of the ideal wishes of mankind. When one believes in such a thing, one feels secure in life, one knows what one ought to strive after, and how one ought to organise one’s emotions and interests to the best purpose. Source:New Introductory Lectures on Psycho-analysis (1933) publ. Hogarth Press. Last lecture reproduced here.

I believe I get what you're alluding to, gratification deterrence is in effect to be mindful of the future, to always have your mind foresight centric. I can easily see how thinking like this can build civilizations that last generations plus can build wealth to sustain and even grow through out these generations. gratification deterrence however seems to me like you'd have to have a higher than normal sense of selflessness. But is selflessness a natural trait in humanity? who exactly is acting in accordance to natural human law, whites or blacks? is there even a human law and if so, how static or dynamic could it be?

Once again good questions, you're really thinking.

I think it isn't so much gratification deterrence at a national level to build civilizations, but at a personal level over centuries.

I think it is the ability to deter what you want and work towards it, say, as with crime. Crime is horrible drain. Rarely is the value of the theft equal to the cost of replacement to the victim; plus the cost of the police, judges, and even incarceration. Nor do thieves create anything meaningful, they just take the possessions of others (yes, I know that COULD spur advancement).

Then there is the education to consider. An educated person adds to society (on an average) while an uneducated person costs, and the inability to deter gratification results in high drop out rates--Staying in school (or an apprenticeship during the pre-modern era) takes a good deal of discipline.

Societies with higher levels of gratification deterrence among their citizens grow over time, and we see this in the growth of non-Negro cultures. Conversely, we see a decline in Negro cultures, almost to a pre-iron age level even when they are handed a fully functioning civilization.

Odd that you bring up selflessness. I think that there needs to be a middle ground . . .too much deterrence and the culture stagnates as was the case with almost all Asian cultures. Too little and they never advance out of barbarism as is the case with Negroes. Civilization, it seems, needs a bit of selfishness and barbarism to grow.

"Pondering the smoking ruins of American racial policy, I wonder whether it isn’t time to say publicly what many, if not most, of both races know: It isn’t working. It isn’t going to work. If it were, it would have. If it were working, we would not need the unending laws to force the races together when they don’t want to be together. If people wanted diversity, it would happen without compulsion." - Fred Reed, January 2, 2014

"Those who rewrite history attempt to hide own disgrace." - Vladimir Putin, January 28th, 2015

Interesting, but I'm more inclined to translate this quote into an altruistic acceptance of life in the present moment, which would not only contradict a belief of selflessness, but your movement's 14 words as a whole. But life is about interpretation of information, which precedes reality. YOu or anyone else will seldom see the same thing as uniform, which is why movements like these will always have a wide range of thinkers.

I think it isn't so much gratification deterrence at a national level to build civilizations, but at a personal level over centuries.

I think it is the ability to deter what you want and work towards it, say, as with crime. Crime is horrible drain. Rarely is the value of the theft equal to the cost of replacement to the victim; plus the cost of the police, judges, and even incarceration. Nor do thieves create anything meaningful, they just take the possessions of others (yes, I know that COULD spur advancement).

you and I are in agreement in this definition. Given your examples, It would seem that gratification deterrence works well with laws and morality. I would even go as far as to say that gratification deterrence is vital to the peace safety and serenity of a society. Having said that, is organized crime (or any crime which calls for a structure, protracted planing and long term commitment) a practice in gratification deterrence? and if so, are black organized criminals in fact an anomalous occurrence in our communities?

Interesting, but I'm more inclined to translate this quote into an altruistic acceptance of life in the present moment, which would not only contradict a belief of selflessness, but your movement's 14 words as a whole. But life is about interpretation of information, which precedes reality. YOu or anyone else will seldom see the same thing as uniform, which is why movements like these will always have a wide range of thinkers.

Let us revisit the quote once again:

Quote:

‘Weltanschauung’ is, I am afraid, a specifically German notion, which it would be difficult to translate into a foreign language. If I attempt to give you a definition of the word, it can hardly fail to strike you as inept. By Weltanschauung, then, I mean an intellectual construction which gives a unified solution of all the problems of our existence in virtue of a comprehensive hypothesis, a construction, therefore, in which no question is left open and in which everything in which we are interested finds a place. It is easy to see that the possession of such a Weltanschauung is one of the ideal wishes of mankind. When one believes in such a thing, one feels secure in life, one knows what one ought to strive after, and how one ought to organise one’s emotions and interests to the best purpose.

The quote, as I intended it was meant to be a springboard from which to introduce other more complex concepts, if one can understand the basic premise of a Weltanschauung or Worldview then one can begin to attack societies multitude of issues, whether they be religious, political or social/class oriented and in addition one could perhaps use this concept to then form or accept a Weltanschau that best addresses the needs, desires and social "problems" of a particular society, Folk or group.

Freud, whom the quote is taken from, was afterall a Jew and he was the counterpart to Jung. Jung and Freud learned much from one another but had a parting of ways and Jung continued to develop his belief that a Folk had its own collective unconscious from which all sources of inspiration and the ability to overcome its inequities.

This suggests then that its not just intelligence, a marker of a person or groups ability to learn and apply said knowledge, but that there is something innate in a people which drives them to be the best they can, in a very simplisitic way of putting it for this threads purposes.

Therefore, I do not agree that it goes against either the 14 words, which states, "We must secure the existence of our people and a future for White Children", which is by definition altruistic and at the same time selfless.

Perhaps you used the wrong word when trying to define selflessness? As altruistic means, just that.

As for seeing things as uniform it is the very thing that possessing and comprehending what a Weltanschauung does for the person, people or group, which creates conformity and uniformity. It can be a religious Weltanschauung, which Freud goes into in the lecture I took the quote from or a political one, or a scientific one; the list of applications can be quite long indeed.

The National Socialists of Germany, affectionatly refered to by one and all as "NAZIS" used the views of Jung and his collective unconsciousness to help explain, disect, and remove from the Germanic people unhealthy principles taught to them by foreign entities, mostly Jews via religion and even to an extent science which is why some began to dabble in more mystical principles and ways of thinking, bypassing both religion and science and Freud goes into this as the lecture as well.

I am not at all saying this lecture should be read by others or that it's some sort of key to things, but it was one attempt, probably of many, to adress this concept to help a people, or group approach life from a more philosophical angle.

you and I are in agreement in this definition. Given your examples, It would seem that gratification deterrence works well with laws and morality. I would even go as far as to say that gratification deterrence is vital to the peace safety and serenity of a society. Having said that, is organized crime (or any crime which calls for a structure, protracted planing and long term commitment) a practice in gratification deterrence? and if so, are black organized criminals in fact an anomalous occurrence in our communities?

I think it does to some degree, at least at the top levels. I might be myopic because of my dealings with negro criminals, but negro gangs aren't so much like the Yakuza, Thugee, or Gambinos. They are more like the Visigoths, Huns, and Mongols. Barbarians, savage, brutal, and willing to take what they want because they want it.

The only reason negro gangs have flourished in the last 45 years is because being negro has become a valid criminal defense (the black rage defense). No doubt, hippie inspired white-guilt has also played a huge part. AND, more importantly, the major shift in the legal profession following WW2. Let us not go what that shift was here, that would really derail this thread, and we're starting to drift already.

If a little green man landed today. He would make some observations. Why are all the little brown, black, white, yellow earthlings trying to bunch up and make one rule for everyone?
Look, the black ones are attacking the white ones. Oh look, here comes an army of brown ones.
Who are those over there? The ones with the small eyes, and hooked nose? What are they doing?

It would seem that gratification deterrence works well with laws and morality.

Funny that you bring that up.

Years ago, many years ago, I was working in a law office dealing with family law.

Now, the law (at that time at least), dictated that a father could be forced to pay a percentage of his earnings for child support that decreased for each child down to a min.

For the life if me, I can't remember the percentages. but many of our negro clients (more so than our non-negro clients), had enough children from different mothers to warrant having to pay up to 6 times their entire salary (600%).

Now, why is this important. Because our laws assumed single pairing couples (husband-wife-children). But, in negro cultures, it seems to be very common for women to have babies of different men AND men to have children with different mothers -- that whole feckless father thing. Western laws were not adapted to this quirk of negro life.

Here is some reading about this development of gratification deterrence I found fascinating.

For our negro guest posters, try to keep an open mind about the information in those articles. All joking aside, this really does seem to answer so many questions about so much in the differences between non-Negroes and Negroes.